AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
N.K. Gupta, J.—Heard on the question of admission. By this Criminal Revision u/s 397 /401 of Cr.P.C. the applicant has challenged the order dated 10.7.2013 passed by the learned Special Judge under SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Seoni in Special Case No. 32/2013 whereby charges of offence under Sections 341 /34 (2 counts), 326 /34 and 326 /120-B(1) of IPC were framed against the respondents No. 1 and 2. Also charge of offence u/s 3(2)(v) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 was framed against the respondent No. 1 Prateek. However, the respondents No. 1 and 2 were discharged from the charges of offence under Sections 307 and 354-D of IPC.
The prosecution case, in short, is that on 18.2.2013 when the prosecutrix was going on her moped in the jurisdiction of Police Station Kotwali, Seoni the respondents No. 1 and 2 stopped her and respondent No. 1 Prateek assaulted her by a knife at seven various places. The case was registered and thereafter committed to the Special Court.
After considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, it would be apparent that the doctor, who examined the prosecutrix had mentioned in the MLC report that all the seven injuries were simple in nature. There was no cumulative effect of those injuries to be fatal or grave. No disfiguration was found. It is true that the respondent No. 1 Prateek assaulted the victim for seven times, however looking to forceless assault, his intention cannot be presumed that he intended to kill the prosecutrix. Under such circumstances, neither the injuries of the prosecutrix were fatal in nature nor the respondents No. 1 and 2 intended to kill her. Under such circumstances, no offence u/s 307 of IPC is made out against the respondents No. 1 and 2. The learned Special Judge has rightly discharged the respondents No. 1 and 2 from that charge.
After considering the FIR, the prosecutrix did not mention that any of the respondent was stalking her in the past. The incident took place on 18.2.2013 and she could not show any reason to the police as to why such incident took place. Under such circumstances, prima facie no offence u/s 354-D of IPC is made out, and therefore if the Special Judge has discharged the respondents No. 1 and 2 from that charge, no illegality or perversity can be said.
No illegality or perversity is visible in the impugned order dated 10.7.2013 passed by the learned Special Judge, Seoni. There is no basis by which the present revision can be accepted. Consequently, the revision filed by the present applicant is hereby dismissed at motion stage. A copy of this order be sent to the trial Court for information.